NFTs
Watch out for these 3 toxic processes, and you can save your NFT project from catastrophe
They are worth keeping an eye out for. Why? Let’s find out.
It’s been 36 years. The fourth reactor of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded just after midnight. No one believed this could happen. And yet, if you travel to Pripyat, Ukraine, you will find an uninhabitable area where only nature flourishes.
What led to such tragedy?
Could it have been prevented?
And why do I bring this up when it comes to NFTs and NFT communities?
When an NFT project goes wrong, there are two types of major errors (IMO): technical and human.
Technical error:
- mint was botted/just plain messed up
- contract is easy to exploit
- WL way too overallocated
- wallets not added to contract in time
- the list goes on…
I’ve seen all of the above happen, and I’m sure you did too. However, with care and attention, this is avoidable, and many projects do this successfully.
What happened in Chernobyl? There were technical errors (I highly recommend watching Chernobyl mini-series on HBO/Hulu if you are interested), but they didn’t necessarily lead to catastrophe taking place.
The biggest contributing factor was: human errors (under this umbrella, I also include politics).
Think about this in an NFT context for a minute
- Denial
USSR: “What you see is not right.
Even if you see it with your own eyes… you didn’t see it, unless your comrade higher up the rank says so.”
NFTs:
Sounds familiar? I’ve been to many discords, and in some, the above is unfortunately true. You are not allowed to ask questions that potentially highlight difficult themes. The community around you closes up and wants to stick with denial. What you say is branded “FUD,” and that’s the end of it. You either stay and stay quiet or leave.
This, in itself, is not an issue but mixed in with other themes, can become a major one.
2. Appearances above anything
USSR: “Ranks matter more than what’s true. In fact, everything is more important than the truth itself. If defending lies costs you lives, well, then that’s the cost. The way you come across matters more than anything.”
NFTs:
Translate the above: if defending our project/founder/lies cost our investors their investment, so be it.
This is also something that rugpulls exploit — they look the part, but they don’t deliver anything. Very, very dangerous.
3. The illusion of choice
In the USSR you’ve had the illusion of choice. The illusion of free will if you like. E.g. you could have opted not to work, but you go to prison.
NFTs:
We are starting to see this surfacing in some projects. Take WZRDS for example: you have had the illusion of choosing to sell your NFT, but hang on a minute, you couldn’t because it was burnt. WTF?!
Illusions of choice? Yes. Toxic? I’d say so. The same applies to polls and surveys conducted within communities, which will then be disregarded.
All of the above is dangerous. Alone they are manageable to a certain degree, but together, they create a toxic mix, which can affect the culture of that particular project. And we can already see that projects rely on their strong communities in a bear market even more so.
Don’t let your project go down the drain because the above 3 have free reign.
